Sister Joan Chittister famously said, "We are each called to go through life reclaiming the planet an inch at a time until the Garden of Eden grows green again." Reflecting on that journey -- a blog at a time -- is the focus of this site.

Friday, January 22, 2010

More from Prop 8 Trial Tracker: The truth that will set us free

Our friends live-blogging the Prop 8 trial are doing an amazing job of bringing what's going on inside the federal courtroom to those of us outside. While not the same as the televised coverage we'd hoped to have, their detailed, comprehensive record of the testimony is an extraordinary gift to everyone watching this trial as an historic legal defense of equal protection for ALL Americans.

From before this trial even began, the Prop 8 legal team has publicly said that they think the trial court’s decision is meaningless. And that may well be. Even if Judge Walker strikes down Prop 8, the order would probably be stayed pending appellate review. The trial is just the first step. It sets up the record going forward, and allows appellate judges to get a feeling for the credibility of the witnesses.

So -- just for fun -- let's take a look at the credibility of one of the witnesses. This is testimony from yesterday's witness: William Tam -- a Prop 8 architect and opponent of marriage equality. (Tam is being questioned by attorney David Boies. Analysis is by Prop 8 Tracker blogger Brian Leubitz.)

Boies: You said that you thought Prop. 8 would lead to legalizing prostitution. Why?Tam: Measure K in SF. I saw some homosexuals hanging around there.B: You know that Measure K has nothing to do with Prop. 8.T: Yes.

So, his first argument was that he saw some homosexuals hanging around San Francisco’s Prop K, a poorly drafted attempt to decriminalize prostitution. Not that all people who supported Prop 8 supported Prop K, or vice versa. Just that he saw some homosexuals hanging around it. Well, as somebody intricately involved in San Francisco politics, I can assure you that many in the LGBT community opposed Prop K, including elected leaders and much of the community. Prop K had nothing, whatsoever, to do with the LGBT community or Prop 8, and Tam acknowledges that. By the way, Prop K lost by a wide margin, even in a city that Tam said was “controlled by homosexuals.”

But that line in the gay agenda that Tam thrusts upon the community pales in comparison to the offensive claim that tops off Tam’s flyer.

B: You told people that next will be legalizing sex with children. That’s the homosexual agenda. Do you believe this?T: Yes.T: Asks and B gives permission to talk. “I’m afraid of the liberal trend. Canada and Europe are liberal and they allow age of consent 13 or 14 and children can have sex with adults and each other.”)B: You did not mention age of consent in the fourteen words you wrote?T: No.B: Age of consent has nothing to do with this [But Tam admitted that he told people that’s what would happen if 8 lost.] Age of consent did not change because of passage of ss marriage in Canada or Europe, right?T: Canada right. I cannot say about Europe.

But this is more than merely patently offensive, it is just plain factually incorrect. And it takes just a few moments of Googling (or binging, whichever you prefer) to figure that one out. Same-sex marriage became the law of the land in Canada in 2005. At the time, the age of consent in Canada was, in fact, 14 years. However, in 2008, while same-sex marriage was legal in Canada, the age of consent was raised to 16. By Tam’s logic, he should be arguing that it is clear that the gay agenda includes an item of increasing the age of consent.

But, of course, the problem with Tam is his rejection of logic. He uses innuendo and vague emotional statements about the welfare of children, and then depends on the website of NARTH, an ex-gay group condemned by mainstream mental health professionals, over accredited, peer-reviewed scientific studies from real professionals. This has nothing to do with what is going on in the real world, but what is going on in a few small minds.

====

Exactly. And I am totally saving that last sentence for future reference. Let's hear it again for emphasis:

"This has nothing to do with what is going on in the real world, but what is going on in a few small minds."

The one thing I'm noticing in the reactions to the trial testimony across the board in blog comments, twitter responses and other venues is a sort of systemic naiveté at just how inane, ridiculous and utterly-without-foundation-in-fact the "facts" from the other side actually are.

This is not a surprise to many of us who have been doing this work for lo-these-many-years within the church ... is a huge revelation to many of those hearing the essence of the arguments for the first time and realizing that this has NOTHING to do with "protecting families" and everything to do with perpetuating ignorance and bigotry.

Which is why it's so important that what's going on in San Francisco reach as wide an audience as possible.

Remember John 8:32 ... "The truth will set you free." The truth is being told in the 9th District Federal Court at this very moment. Stay tuned. Pay attention. And then let's go and do likewise.

And now ... since today is my day off and I can ... I'm going back to Trial Tracker to see what's going on. At last glance, the issue was whether homosexuality is a "disorder" and whether sexual orientation is matter of "choice." On the stand is psychologist Dr. Gregory Hererk ... being questioned about the decision in the 70's by American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from its "pathological" list.

Judge: What led to the change?Hererk: That’s a long story.Judge: Well, we’re here for a while.

4 comments:

The whole thing is making me sick. Now they are obsessing with whether people change, with whether people who come out later in life are sufficiently GLBT because they had hetero relationships. Why not ask whether self-identifying heteros who have had same sex experiences are sufficiently straight?

And if marriage is marriage is marriage....it doesn't really matter if you were married to a man, divorce, and then remarry a woman. It's no different than if you were married to a man, divorce, and marry another man. The only time the "definition" matters is if you want to deprive someone of fullparticipation.

And at the end of the day the case that's being made is NONE OF THIS IS GERMANE to whether same sex couples are entitled to the same equal protection as opposite sex couples.

Maybe I've been "vaccinated" by all the years of putting up with this crap in church debates ... I'm at the point where I figure there more ignorant and "dizzying" their arguments are the brighter the light we should shine on them.

Then we photoshop their logo from "Protect Marriage" to "Protect Ignorant Bigotry" and see how they do on the fundraising.

Strictly speaking, the increase in the age of consent in Canada is completely unrelated to the legalization of equal marriage.

It should, perhaps, be noted that the Conservative government which raised the age of consent is the same one which permitted a free vote on redefining marriage as a man and a woman. However, the number of Liberal (and Bloc Quebecois) MPs who voted to move backwards were outnumbered by the Conservative MPs who voted to stay the course. Only one party voted 100% for equal marriage - the social democratic Ndew Democrats.

On the age of consent, there were good public policy arguments on both sides of the issue, but one positive aspect is that the age of consent is now consistent reghardless of the sexual act involved. Previously, the age of consent was 14 for heterosexual acts and 18 for homosexual acts. The new legislation also retained the "close in age" exemption (ie, if a 16 year old has sex with a 15 year old, the 16 year old is not a criminal). It also retained the proviso that the age of consent is 18 in certain circumstances - ie, if the older person is in a position of authority (boss, parent, police officer, priest) or where the sexual contact is prostitution.

Welcome to my blog ...

... where I try to be really clear about what I'm clear about. For example:

Religious persecution is when you're prevented from exercising your beliefs, not when you're prevented from IMPOSING your beliefs.

========

Until we end the blatant and indefensible discrimination of DOMA we are not living up to the pledge we make to be a nation of liberty and justice for all, we are not providing the equal protection guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to same-sex couples and we are failing to defend the self-evident truth that our forbearers fought to protect: that ALL people are created equal.

============ Using "biblical standards" to condemn those who understand that sexual orientation is morally neutral makes as much sense as using "biblical standards" to condemn astronomers who understand that the earth revolves around the sun. The Bible may have said it but that doesn't always settle it. ============ It's liberty and justice for all -- not some. It's respect the dignity of every human being -- not just straight ones. Got it? Great. Let's do it.

====== In order to keep moving forward toward liberty and justice for all we can't just be right about what the 1st Amendment protects. We have to be smart about how we respond to those who skipped the 9th Commandment and think lying is a Traditional Family Value. ======= Jesus said "Love your neighbor." Not "Love your neighbor unless your neighbor is gay."

Basic Bio

A cradle Episcopalian second generation Dodger fan ENFJ native of Los Angeles I was ordained in 1996 and currently serve as a Senior Associate at All Saints Church, Pasadena.
My family consists of my wife Lori, 2 dogs, (Luna and Betsy), 3 cats (Maui, Cherokee and Harold) and our four nearly-grown kids: Jim, Brian, Grace and Emily.
My life in the church has included everything from Junior Altar Guild with my Aunt Gretchen to my “obligatory young adult lapsed phase” to a tour of duty on the St. Paul’s, Ventura vestry where I also worked as parish secretary to a life-heart-soul changing experience as part of the Cursillo community to serving on my parish ECW Board to seminary at the School of Theology in Claremont to associate/day school chaplain positions at St. Mark’s, Altadena and St. Peter’s, San Pedro to Executive Director of Claiming the Blessing to my current parish position at All Saints Church. It’s been a long and winding road and the journey continues: an inch at a time.

Bottom Line:

A Comment On Comments

Strongly held perspectives are appreciated. Ad hominem attacks will be deleted. When in doubt, revisit page 305 of the BCP and if what you're typing doesn't meet the "respect the dignity" clause of the Baptismal Covenant then save us both some time and energy and don't hit "send."

DISCLAIMER

This blog is the personal weblog of one Susan Lynn Russell. The opinions expressed herein are hers and hers alone. The postions taken on matters theological or political (or anything else, for that matter) are in no way to be construed as the official positions of any other person, institution, group or organization.

Other Cool Stuff I Get To Do

Smart things other people have said you should know about

“Faith in action is called politics. Spirituality without action is fruitless and social action without spirituality is heartless. We are boldly political without being partisan. Having a partisan-free place to stand liberates the religious patriot to see clearly, speak courageously, and act daringly.” -- Ed Bacon

“Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice. Justice at its best is love correcting everything that stands against love.” – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

"It's time for "tolerant" religious people to acknowledge the straight line between the official anti-gay theologies of their denominations and the deaths of these young people. Nothing short of changing our theology of human sexuality will save these young and precious lives." -- The Rt Rev Gene Robinson

"How can you initiate someone into the Body of Christ and then treat them like they’re half-assed baptized?" - The Rt Rev Barbara Harris

“I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ~ Elie Wiesel, 1986 Nobel Peace Prize

"Resolve to be tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving and tolerant with the weak and wrong. Sometime in your life, you will have been all of these." — Siddhārtha Gautama

"I'm so glad Mary didn't wait for the formulation of a Doctrine of the Incarnation before she said 'Yes' to God." -- Ed Bacon

"The great Easter truth is not that we will be born again someday but that we are to be alive here and now by the power of the resurrection." -- Philips Brooks (paraphrase)

"History belongs to the intercessors, who believe the future into being.” -- Walter Wink

“Patience, a quality of holiness may be sloth in the soul when associated with the lack of righteous indignation.” -- Abraham Heschel

"Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what difference it makes that you believe!" -- Verna Dozier

“We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief. Nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief. At the same time as our constitution prohibits state religion, establishment of it protects the free exercise of all religions. And walking this fine line requires government to be strictly neutral.” -- Ronald Reagan

Let's be clear. The fact that the State authorizes a marriage in no way compels any Church to perform or recognize it. Marriage equality merely guarantees equality under the law to all citizens; it does not compel churches to do anything.-- Katherine Ragsdale